On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 11:36:23PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 09/01/19 23:21, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > lockdep_assert_held() is better suited to checking locking requirements,
> > since it only checks if the current thread holds the lock regardless of
> > whether someone else does. This is also a step towards possibly removing
> > spin_is_locked().
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]>
> > Cc: "Radim Krčmář" <[email protected]>
> > Cc: <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > index 1f888a103f78..ec758bb7eeba 100644
> > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > @@ -4078,7 +4078,7 @@ static int kvm_suspend(void)
> >  static void kvm_resume(void)
> >  {
> >     if (kvm_usage_count) {
> > -           WARN_ON(raw_spin_is_locked(&kvm_count_lock));
> > +           lockdep_assert_held(&kvm_count_lock);
> >             hardware_enable_nolock(NULL);
> >     }
> >  }
> 
> Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]>

Applied, thank you!

                                                        Thanx, Paul

Reply via email to